managing public records compliance - fccma.org
Post on 30-Jan-2022
6 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 1
Authorship and Acknowledgements
USF School of Public Affairs Research Team: Contributing Members
Christopher Gillotte
USF MPA Student
Sea Marshall-Barley
USF MPA Student
Molly Murphy
USF MPA Student
Stephen Neely
USF School of Public Affairs Assistant Professor
Susan Obarski
USF MPA Graduate
Olivia Patch
USF MPA Student
Corresponding Author: Stephen R. Neely
Please direct all correspondences regarding this report to the following address:
Stephen R. Neely, Ph.D. University of South Florida – School of Public Affairs 4202 East Fowler Avenue SOC 107 Tampa, FL 33620 srneely@usf.edu (813)974-7573
We would like to sincerely thank Lynn Tipton (FCCMA Executive Director), Carol Russell (FCCMA
Executive Assistant), Sally Sherman (County Administrator, Flagler County), Jamil Jreisat (Professor,
University of South Florida School of Public Affairs), Jill Silverboard (Assistant City Manager, City of
Clearwater), and Shawn Sherrouse (Assistant to the City Manager, City of Auburndale) for their support
in conducting this research. We would also like to thank the FCCMA member agencies who took the
time to thoughtfully respond to the survey.
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 2
Abstract
This report summarizes a recent survey of city and county governments in the State of
Florida. In light of recent policy concerns, the survey addressed several key topics associated
with the receipt and fulfillment of public records requests, including policies and procedures,
employee training, trends in the volume of requests, administrative burden, and the use of
emerging technologies to disseminate public information. The survey and analysis was
conducted by researchers from the University of South Florida’s School of Public Affairs in
cooperation with the Florida City and County Management Association (FCCMA). This report
includes a brief introduction to Florida’s public records laws, along with an accompanying
discussion of recent policy concerns; a summary of the survey and its findings; as well as a brief
discussion of opportunities for improving public management in the area of public records
compliance.
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 3
Contents
List of Tables and Figures .…………………………………………………………….………..……………………………….. 4
Introduction …………….………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………… 5
Survey Methodology ….………………………………………………………………………………………….………………… 8
Survey Results ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……… 9
Volume and Burden ...……………………………………………………………….…………..…………….………. 9
Policies and Procedures ……..……………………………………………………………..…………………….… 11
Training ………………….………………………………………………..………………………………………………… 13
Big Data ………………………………………………………………………………………………………........……... 15
Open Data ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……… 17
Analysis and Conclusions ……………..…………………………………………….…………….…………………………… 19
Recommendations ...…………………………………………………………………………………………….……………..… 22
Works Cited ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………..… 23
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 4
List of Tables and Figures
Figure 1: Current Volume of Public Records Requests …….……………………………………………………….. 9
Table 1: Organizational Capacity and Workflow …………….……………………………………………………… 10
Figure 2: Standardized Processes for Handling Public Records Requests ….…………………………… 11
Figure 3: Type of Standardized Process ……………………………………………………………………………….... 12
Table 2: Common Practices for Handling Public Records Requests ...………………..…………….…….. 12
Figure 4: Do All Employees Receive Public Records Training ……..…………..…………………………….… 13
Table 3: Methods of Training ………………….……………………………………………………………………………… 14
Figure 5: Current Volume of Big Data Requests ………………………………………………………........……... 15
Table 4: Impact of Big Data Requests on Organizational Capacity and Workflow …………………… 16
Figure 6: Trends in Big Data Requests Over Recent Years ………………………….…………………………… 16
Figure 7: Agencies Currently Providing Proactively Available Open Data ……………………………..… 17
Table 5: Commonly Provided Open Data ………………………………………………………………….……….…… 18
Figure 8: Primary Responsibility for Managing Open Data Portals …………………………………..…..… 18
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 5
Introduction
The State of Florida has a long and robust history of open government, boasting some of
the nations’ oldest and most extensive public records laws1. Specifically, Chapter 119 of the
Florida Statutes (hereafter referred to as “The Public Records Law”) makes it state policy that
“all state, county, and municipal records are open for personal inspection and copying by any
person”2. The law places the burden of responsibility for maintaining and furnishing public
records on each individual agency and prescribes specific penalties for non-compliance3.
Furthermore, a recent amendment to The Public Records Law enacted in 2013 expanded the
law’s scope to include all private individuals and entities that have been contracted to provide
services on behalf of a government agency4. Under this amendment, private contractors are
required to keep and maintain any records that would normally be required of the public
agency if it were providing the service in question, and to furnish them upon request in
accordance with the requirements of The Public Records Law.
There is no disagreement that these safeguards on transparency and accountability to
the public are essential for effective and democratic governance. However, local governments
and private contractors in Florida have faced emerging challenges over recent years with regard
to the implementation of The Public Records Law and its provisions. Many contractors and
municipalities have become embroiled in costly legal proceedings over technical and obscure
violations of the state’s Public Records Law. Others have found themselves overwhelmed by an
excessive volume of persistent and at times “harassing”5 requests made by a select few
individuals and organizations6.
For example, over the course of 2014, one public records seeking organization alone
filed more than 140 public records related lawsuits in 27 counties7. In many cases, the technical
violations for which they sued were the result of public records requests made to front-line city
employees or initiated through obscure email addresses, which were often misinterpreted as
spam8. Despite the questionable tactics used to generate these lawsuits, many local
governments and private contractors have opted to pay lump sum settlements out of court in
order to avoid the risk of even higher litigation costs. In several instances the lawsuits were
brought against nonprofit organizations that had been contracted to provide government
1 Petersen et al. (2009); 2 Florida Statutes, Chapter 119 3 Florida Statutes, Chapter 119.10 4 Florida Statutes, Chapter 119.0701 5 Florida League of Cities (2015) 6 Korten and Aaronson (2014); Rizzardi (2015) 7 Korten and Aaronson (2014) 8 Brassfield (2015)
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 6
services and were seemingly unfamiliar with their legal obligations under the 2013 amendment
to The Public Records Law. Among the list of targeted agencies were organizations such as
River of Life (a small social services agency located in Miami), a Catholic charity in Sarasota
County, and ChildNet (a nonprofit organization located in Broward County, dedicated to the
protection of abused and neglected children)9.
In other instances, cities and counties have been overwhelmed by an excessive volume
of public records requests, which has adversely impacted their ability to carry out essential
government functions. For example, one small coastal town, with a population of less than
1,000 people10, received over 1,100 public records requests in the span of a year, with over 900
coming from only two individuals/organizations11. In another case, a small city in Broward
County received more than 600 public records requests from the same individual over the
course of one year. The result was a significant expenditure of government resources and
manpower, including extensive investments of time on the part of the city-manager, city-
attorney, and city-clerk12.
While The Public Records Law guarantees open access to government records for all
individuals, these recent activities appear to exploit the letter of the law while violating its
spirit, namely the protection of citizen’ interests and the successful, transparent functioning of
local governments. If left unchecked, these trends pose significant concerns for local agencies,
their contracted service providers, and the citizens that they represent. For example:
To date, legal proceedings and out of court settlements are estimated to have cost
millions in taxpayer dollars13, which can translate into diminished service provision
and/or increases in tax rates for local citizens.
The requirement to fulfill excessive public records requests in a timely manner can
overburden local agencies, thereby slowing down other essential functions and
increasing the cost of doing business for local governments. In some cases,
overburdened cities have been required to hire additional personnel for the sole
purpose of fulfilling public records requests14.
9 Korten and Aaronson (2014) 10 City of Gulf Stream, FL: http://www.gulf-stream.org/ 11 Rizzardi (2015) 12 Florida League of Cities (2015) 13 Vandler Velde (2013) 14 Rizzardi (2015)
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 7
The cost and quality of government services may also be impacted if these trends
deter would-be service providers from engaging in government contracts or
discourage capable professionals from seeking careers in the public sector15.
While these practices have garnered statewide attention over recent years,
amendments designed to address potential abuses of The Public Records Law were not enacted
during the most recent legislative session16. For local governments and their contracted service
providers, this means that the threat of costly lawsuits and workflow disruptions still remains
very real, emphasizing the need for continued vigilance and enhanced awareness.
To that end, this report summarizes the results of a recent survey conducted by
researchers at the University of South Florida’s School of Public Affairs on behalf of the Florida
City and County Management Association (FCCMA). The survey asked for feedback from
FCCMA’s member agencies on a number of issues, particularly:
1. Current trends in the volume of public records requests being received;
2. The impact of current request volumes on workflow and administrative functions;
3. Agency-level policies and procedures for handling public record requests;
4. Employee training in the area of public records policies and procedures;
5. The use of emerging technologies to disseminate public records.
The purpose of this report is to provide FCCMA and its member agencies with specific
data to improve their understanding of recent trends across the state, and to identify areas of
opportunity for the refinement and improvement of procedures, training, and technology
usage. After a brief explanation of methodology, the report summarizes survey responses in
each of the primary areas identified above, followed by some brief analysis and concluding
recommendations.
15 Rizzardi (2015) 16 See Florida SB 224
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 8
Survey Methodology
In collaboration with FCCMA, the USF research team conducted a web-based survey of
FCCMA member agencies, using a tailored design survey methodology17, including multiple
contacts (i.e. pre-notice, survey delivery, and personalized follow-ups) in order to increase
response rates. The sample included all city and county governments in the State of Florida
with either a manager or assistant manager currently registered as an active FCCMA member.
The survey was delivered to 26 counties and 180 cities, for a total sample size of 206. The
survey instructions and verification of responses assured that only one response was recorded
for each agency. Completed responses were received from 105 agencies, for a total response
rate of 51%. The completed responses included 11 county agencies (42% response rate) and 94
city/town agencies (52% response rate). Due to the small number of counties included in the
final responses, city-county comparisons are excluded from the analysis below. The figures
included below reflect the number of valid responses to each question and do not include cases
with missing data. A copy of the full survey instrument is available upon request from the
authors.
17 Dillman (2007)
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 9
Survey Results
1. Volume and Burden
Survey respondents were asked a number of questions about their current volume of
public records requests. Responses to these questions are discussed below. The first question
asked participants to describe their agency’s current volume of requests (Figure 1). The
responses were evenly distributed, with most agencies reporting that the volume was
“moderate” (41%), and nearly one-third (31%) reporting a “high” or “very high” volume of
requests.
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
Participants were also asked how their current volume of public records requests
impacts organizational capacity and workflow. The responses are provided in Table 1 below.
As the data show, most respondents indicated that the current volume of public records
requests does not negatively impact workflow or exceed their organizational capacity to fulfill
them. However, one-third (33%) of respondents did indicate some level of agreement that the
current volume is negatively impacting their employees’ ability to fulfill other job functions.
10%
21%
41%
21%
7%
Very High High Moderate Low Very Low
Figure 1: Current Volume of Public Record Requests (n=104)
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 10
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
While most of the responding agencies indicated that handling the current volume of
public records requests is not a major concern given their organizational capacity, it is worth
reemphasizing that one-third of respondents (33%) indicated some level of agreement that the
current volume of requests does negatively impact their employees’ ability to fulfill other job
functions. These numbers are consistent with the targeted nature of the recent trends
discussed above, but they may also raise significant concerns for other agencies going forward.
As shown in Table 1 (above), 70% of responding agencies indicated that the volume of requests
has been increasing over recent years. If these trends continue, it is possible that an even
greater number of local agencies may begin to feel the weight of administrative burden
associated with excessive public records requests.
Table 1: Organizational Capacity and Workflow
The number of public record requests that we receive…
Strongly Agree Agree
Neither Agree
nor Disagree Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Negatively impacts our employees’ ability to fulfill other job functions (n=103)
14% 19% 31% 32% 4%
Is larger than our capacity to fulfill them in a timely manner (n=102)
6% 8% 28% 44% 14%
Has been increasing over recent years (n=104)
30% 40% 20% 9% 1%
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 11
2. Policies and Procedures
The next section of the survey addressed agency-level policies and procedures for
handling public records requests. Respondents were asked whether their agency had a
standardized process in place for handling requests, as well as what form that process took. In
total, 96% of respondents indicated that their city/county had a “standardized process” in place
(Figure 2).
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
However, as Figure 3 shows below, only 55% of the responding cities and counties have
codified their process as a “formal written policy” at this point in time. Although The Public
Records Law requires agencies to maintain open public records, it does not mandate that
agencies have specific, organizational-level policies and procedures for carrying out this
responsibility. Given the recent trends discussed above, wherein many Florida municipalities
have been sued for improper handling of requests, a greater emphasis on codifying
standardized processes may help protect cities and counties from unnecessary legal action.
This may also provide clearer guidance for employees in determining how to respond when
presented with a public records request, as well as what items are exempt from The Public
Records Law, including anything regarding “competitive solicitation,” or an open bid.
96%
4%
Figure 2: Standardized Processes for Handling Public Records Requests (n=104)
Yes
No
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 12
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
When asked for a more detailed description of their policies and procedures, the vast
majority of agencies (76%) indicated that responses are either directly handled or coordinated
by a member of the city/county clerk’s office. This is not surprising, as the city/county clerk
acts as the primary custodian of records for many Florida municipalities. The results did not
identify any statistically significant relationships between the type of standardized process and
reported challenges in workflow and capacity, though it should be noted that these results may
be attenuated by necessarily small sample sizes in many instances.
Table 2: Common Practices for Handling Public Records Requests
Which of the following best describes your city/county’s current process for handling public records requests… Count Percent
By the city/county clerk's (or equivalent) office 41 39%
By one person, not a member of the city/county clerk's office 3 3%
By the relevant department(s) 5 5%
By the relevant department(s) with coordination by the city/county clerks' office
38 37%
By the relevant department(s) with coordination by one person, not a member of the city/county clerks' office
7 7%
Other 10 10%
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
55%
45%
Formal Written Policy
Unwritten Standard Practice
Figure 3: Type of Standardized Process (n=104)
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 13
3. Training
Knowledge of The Public Records Law as well as of agency-level implementation
procedures is essential for Florida’s public employees. This reality has been underscored by
recent lawsuits, many of which resulted from improperly handled requests that were originally
made to front-line employees. Given this concern, the survey examined prevailing practices for
training employees in the handling and fulfillment of public records requests. These questions
were particularly relevant to recent legislative efforts, as proposed amendments to The Public
Records Law, which failed to pass in the most recent legislative session, would have required
more comprehensive training of agency employees in the handling and fulfilment of public
records requests. While these proposed changes have not yet been reintroduced by the
legislature, it is still possible that similar provisions will arise in future legislation.
Given the importance of this issue, respondents were asked about the extent to which
employees receive training related to the handling and fulfillment of public records requests, as
well as which methods of training most frequently are employed. As shown in Figure 4 below,
over half of the survey respondents (56%) indicated that all employees receive some form of
training on public records requests, while 44% indicated that not all employees are trained.
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
Respondents were also asked to indicate the ways in which employees are made aware
of the process for handling public records requests. As shown in Table 3 below, the most
common form of training reported by survey respondents was informal coaching, with 51% of
respondents indicating that their agency employs this type of training. Informal coaching is
considered to be casual, conversational, impromptu guidance given one-on-one, or in a group.
A significant number (40%) indicated that employees receive formal, in person training. Formal
56%
44%
Yes
No
Figure 4: Do All Employees Receive Public Records Training (n=102)
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 14
training is considered to be an organized, structured, and documented process used to train
employees on the proper way to handle public records requests. According to the survey
results, the least commonly utilized method for training employees is computer based training,
with only 5% of survey respondents indicating that they utilize this technique.
Table 3: Methods of Training How are employees made aware of the process for handling public record requests… Count Percent*
Formal, in-person training 42 40%
Informal coaching 54 51%
Computer based training 5 5%
Provided with written or electronic copies of the process 36 34%
The process is posted publically in municipal workplaces 6 6%
*Percentages to do not add up to 100% because many agencies utilize multiple forms of training, and respondents were able to select all options that apply.
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
In its current form, The Public Records Law does not require all public employees to
receive training on agency-specific procedures for processing and handling public records
requests or on the general statute itself. Indeed, specific comments provided by survey
respondents indicated that in many instances only designated public records custodians receive
significant training. However, it should be noted that many of the public records requests
resulting in legal action against government agencies over recent years were targeted at front-
line employees. This suggests that enhanced employee training may be a critical step toward
protecting agencies from costly legal actions, especially as the nature of public records requests
becomes more complex. While informal coaching is the most commonly utilized method of
training among respondents, agencies may want to consider a more formal approach to
training for all employees in order to help protect themselves from legal exposure due to
unintended violations of The Public Records Law.
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 15
4. Big Data
Another trend of significant concern among local agencies has been increases in
requests for “Big Data”. In the context of this survey, Big Data was defined as “requests for
large amounts of public information that may come from multiple sources, files, etc., and may
require reorganization and manipulation in order to be analyzed”. Big Data allows for wider
critical reflection and greater examination of emerging trends, but for local agencies these data
requests often require considerable time and effort on the part of city employees, raising
potential concerns over administrative burden and workflow. Some examples of Big Data
requests include requests for large amounts of utility usage data by address or requests for
detailed budgetary data over a multi-year period.
In order to measure the prevalence of these requests, as well as policies and procedures
for handling them, respondents were asked several questions about the volume and processing
of Big Data requests in their agencies. As shown in Figure 5, most respondents indicate that the
current volume of Big Data requests ranges from “moderate” to “very low”, while only 10% of
respondents indicate that the volume is either “high” or “very high”.
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
As with general public records requests, respondents were asked to indicate how the
current volume of Big Data requests impacts organizational capacity and workflow (Table 4).
Despite the majority of respondents indicating that current levels of Big Data requests are
moderate to low, 42% indicated that the current volume negatively impacts their employees’
ability to fulfill other job functions. This gives an idea of how time-consuming and labor
intensive these requests can be, even when their volume is low.
1%
9%
38%36%
16%
Very High High Moderate Low Very Low
Figure 5: Current Volume of Big Data Requests (n=104)
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 16
Table 4: Impact of Big Data Requests on Organizational Capacity and Workflow
The number of big data requests that we receive…
Strongly Agree Agree
Neither Agree
nor Disagree Disagree
Strongly Disagree
Negatively impacts our employee's ability to fulfill other job functions (n=103)
12% 30% 30% 24% 4%
Is larger than our capacity to fulfill them in a timely manner (n=103)
6% 14% 36% 35% 10%
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
When asked about the volume of Big Data requests over recent years, more than half of
respondents (52%) indicated that they have been “increasing” or “significantly increasing”
(Figure 6). From these results, it can be summarized that while many agencies are doing an
adequate job of adapting to increases in Big Data requests, others are finding it difficult to fulfill
these requests in a timely and efficient manner. As the volume of these requests continues to
rise, these challenges may become more widespread. The “Open Data” options discussed in
the next section may provide local agencies with one means of alleviating these administrative
burdens.
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
10%
42%47%
1% 0%
SignificantyIncreasing
Increasing Neither Increasingnor Decreasing
Decreasing SignificantlyDecreasing
Figure 6: Trends in Big Data Requests Over Recent Years (n=102)
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 17
5. Open Data
One way that Florida’s local governments can attempt to expediently fulfill public record
requests while eliminating administrative burden and workflow disruptions is through the use
of “Open Data” portals. In the context of this survey, Open Data refers to “data and
information that are made proactively available through the agency’s webpage or other easily
accessible application, and which can be easily searched, retrieved, downloaded, and sorted for
analysis”. By making commonly requested data proactively available in online formats, public
administrators can quickly fulfil electronic requests for information by directing requestors to
the relevant information online. This form of data availability also promotes greater
transparency among public agencies.
In the final section of the survey, respondents were asked whether their agency is
currently providing public information through Open Data applications, as well as what forms of
data they currently provide through these means. Figure 7 shows that a large majority of
respondents (77%) are making use of Open Data platforms to at least some degree.
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
As Table 5 shows, the most common form of Open Data is budgetary summaries with
approximately 73% of respondents stating they make these readily available to the public
online. However, less than a one-third of respondents reported providing any other type of
information in an Open Data format, suggesting that there are significant areas for expanding
the use of Open Data among Florida municipalities.
77%
23%
Yes
No
Figure 7: Agencies Currently Providing Proactively Available Open Data (n=102)
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 18
Table 5: Commonly Provided Open Data
Which forms of data does your city/county currently provide in an open data format?
Count Percentage*
Budgetary Summaries 77 73%
Detailed Expenditure Data 32 30%
Educational Data 26 25%
Policing Data 24 23%
Utility Usage 9 9%
Other 29 28%
*Percentages to do not total 100% because respondents were able to select all options that apply.
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
As shown in Figure 8 below, the majority of Open Data applications are currently
managed by either the City/County Clerk’s office (35%) or the Information Technology
Department (28%). The use of external service providers to manage Open Data applications is
rare among Florida’s local governments, with only 1% of agencies indicating the use of an
outside contractor for these purposes.
Source: 2015 FCCMA Public Records Survey
14%
1%
22%
28%
35%
Other
Outside Contractor
Each Department Independently
Information Technology
City/County Clerk's Office
Figure 8: Primary Responsibility for Managing Open Data Portals (n=79)
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 19
Analysis and Conclusions
Compliance with provisions of The Public Records Law and issues of enforcement
generated several recent policy concerns for local Florida municipalities. This study was
conducted in order to determine current trends in the volume of public records requests, how
they impact organizational management and workflow, what policies and procedures are
currently in place for handling public records requests, how employees are trained, and the
extent to which local governments are utilizing technology to proactively disseminate public
information. The results identify several key areas where public agencies may remain
vulnerable to threats of workflow disruption or even costly litigation due to excessive public
records requests and technical non-compliance with The Public Records Law.
With regard to volume and organizational capacity, nearly one-third of respondents
(31%) indicated some level of workflow disruption due to the current volume of
public records requests in general, and a slightly larger number (42%) indicated the
same with regard to Big Data requests in particular.
A large majority of respondents (70%) indicated that the volume of public records
requests they receive has been increasing over recent years, with a small majority
(52%) indicating the same in regard to Big Data requests.
Collectively, the results suggest that requests for public information are increasing in
general, and that complex requests for Big Data comprise a significant portion of
these queries.
Given these findings, the management of public records compliance should be an
increasingly important concern for local governments in Florida. While many agencies did not
report current workflow disruptions, these trends suggest that now may be the time to
reexamine organizational approaches to managing public records compliance in order to
mitigate the impact of further increases in the volume and complexity of public records
requests. Three particular areas where public administrators can seek to improve the
management of public records compliance is through the codification of formal, agency-level
policies and procedures, through enhanced training of employees in public records compliance,
and through expanded use of Open Data tools to disseminate public information and fulfill
public records requests.
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 20
While a large majority of survey respondents (96%) indicated that their agency did
have a standardized process in place for handling public records requests, nearly half
(45%) indicated that the procedure was an unwritten, standard practice, and not
formally codified in writing.
Working to develop and disseminate formally codified policies at the agency-level may
help to provide clarity and guidance for employees with regard to the proper handling of public
records requests. Structured guidelines may help to reduce reflexive, individual responses to
requests, thereby limiting the threat of potential lawsuits for non-compliance. Formal
guidelines may also help to promote greater understanding for the agency’s contracted service
providers regarding their responsibilities under The Public Records Law.
In the area of training, 44% of respondents indicated that not all employees receive
training in public records compliance.
The most common form of training utilized among all respondents was “informal
coaching” (51%). Less than half of respondents indicated the use of formal, in-
person training (40%), and only 5% reported the use of computer-based training
modules.
While many agencies reported that only designated records custodians received training
on public records compliance, many of the lawsuits generated over technical violations of The
Public Records Law in recent years have resulted from requests made directly to front-line
employees. Given these trends, we recommend a more comprehensive approach to employee
training, one which would promote a culture of understanding throughout the
agency/organization with regard to The Public Records Law in general as well as specific,
agency-level policies and procedures. In particular we recommend an increased use of
computer-based training modules. While the costs and time associated with training all
employees in public records compliance can be prohibitive, research has demonstrated that
online instruction can help to alleviate the workload associated with training and mitigate the
costs of providing instruction to all employees18.
A Majority of respondents (77%) reported some form of online data dissemination,
though the use of Open Data applications appears to be limited in scope.
18 Kimball (2011)
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 21
The only type of data made available by a majority of respondents was budgetary
summaries (73%). Less than one-third of responding agencies reported providing
any other specific form of data online.
As the volume and complexity of public records requests increases, Open Data
applications represent a powerful opportunity for local governments to provide public
information in a comprehensive and efficient manner. In the long-run, an increased use of
Open Data platforms could reduce the administrative burden associated with fulfilling public
records requests, protect local agencies from costly litigation, and provide greater value for
citizens and community stakeholders through easier access to public information.
In conclusion, based on these findings we believe that a renewed focus on public
records compliance is both warranted and essential in order for local agencies to mitigate
organizational risks and ensure optimal governance for the citizens that they serve. We
recommend an increased focus on codifying agency-level policies and procedures, a more
formal and comprehensive approach to training employees in public records compliance, and
an expanded use of Open Data technologies to streamline the fulfillment of public records
requests while mitigating administrative burdens. These steps toward improved public
management will not only help to improve government workflow, but may also help to protect
local agencies from unnecessary legal costs going forward.
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 22
Recommendations
General recommendations for improving public management based on the results of this study
include the following:
1. Develop a renewed focus on public records compliance in order to ensure that
organizational culture and implementation procedures account for recent changes and
trends in the policy environment.
2. Establish clear, agency-level guidelines and procedures for implementation of The Public
Records Law in order to prevent ambiguity and eliminate non-compliant responses to
public records requests.
3. Provide updated training for all public employees, with a focus on proper handling and
fulfillment of public records requests.
4. Develop a greater reliance on Open Data platforms in order to optimize the use of
technological and web-based options for disseminating public information.
5. Charge reasonable fees, as defined by The Public Records Law, particularly in the case of
large scale and/or multiple requests.
Managing Public Records Compliance Page | 23
Works Cited
Brassfield, Mike. (2015, July 6). Lawsuits from Public Records Group are a Nuisance, Florida
Cities Say. Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved from http://www.tampabay.com/news/humaninterest/lawsuits-from-public-records-group-are-a-nuisance-florida-cities-say/2236362
City of Gulf Stream, Florida. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.gulf-stream.org/ Dillman, Don. (2007). Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method (2nd Ed.). New
York: John Wiley and Sons. Florida League of Cities. (2015). 2016 Legislative Action Agenda: Public Records. Retrieved
from http://www.floridaleagueofcities.com/Assets/Files/Advocacy/2016_IB_PublicRecords.pdf
Florida Statutes, Chapter 119. Retrieved from http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?
App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0100-0199/0119/0119.html Florida Senate Bill 224. Retrieved from http://flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2015/0224 Kimball, Michelle Bush. (2011). Mandated State-Level Open Government Training Programs.
Government Information Quarterly 28: 474-483. Korten, Tristram and Aaronson, Trevor. (2014, November 9). In Lawsuits Statewide, Questions
of Profit and Public Records. Miami Herald. Retrieved from http://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article3683176.html
Petersen, Barbara, et al. (2009). Reforming Florida’s Open Government Laws in the 21st
Century. The Commission on Open Government Reform. Retrieved from http://floridafaf.org/files/2012/12/Commission-On-Open-Government.-Final-Report-Open-Government-Reports.pdf
Rizzardi, Keith. (2015). Sunburned: How Misuse of the Public Records Laws Creates an
Overburdened, More Expensive, and Less Transparent Government. Stetson Law Review 44(2).
Vender Velde, Jessica. (2013, January 21). Public Records Watchdog Sues Several Tampa Bay
Agencies. Tampa Bay Times. Retrieved from http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/civil/public-records-watchdog-sues-several-tampa-bay-agencies/1271682
top related